Seri verbs: multiple complexities

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Many languages show seemingly arbitrary elaboration of their inflection. For example, most English nouns can take a plural ending, but it is not the same for every noun: compare bird-s, ox-en, and phenomen-a. Exactly which one to use is an additional fact that must be learnt and remembered. In this case that might not seem all that great a task, but there are languages which far outstrip English, adding an extra layer of seemingly gratuitous complexity to the already considerable machinery that languages employ for the expression of meaning. Within a general theory of language, such morphological complexity is rather the elephant in the room: it is far from clear what it's doing there, and why it is taking up so much space. One of the most extreme examples of inflectional variation - the most extreme, we would argue - comes from Seri, a language isolate spoken by approximately 900 people on the Sonoran coast in Mexico. According to the best information we have there are over 500 inflection classes for the paradigm used to mark subject and event number (i.e. whether the verb subject is singular or plural, and whether the action occurs once or multiple times). This dwarfs anything we are aware of in any other language - for the sake of comparison, note that this is seven times the number of classes that French has, a language well known for the complexity of its verbal system. This makes the Seri verb system something of a nec plus ultra of morphological complexity: crack this, and the puzzle is cracked once and for all.Note that the complexity of this system involves far more than can be conveyed by a mere enumeration of the number of endings or the number of classes. First, unlike e.g. English, there is no clear division between regular and irregular verbs: irregularity pervades the entire system, so that it is hard to make even an educated guess as to what the forms of a given verb would be. A second complicating factor comes way forms are distributed in the paradigm, which prevents us from assign a fixed function to the morphological formatives, and adds to the set of facts the learner must acquire. Nevertheless, the system is not chaotic, and follows a strict morphological hierarchy. Whether this hierarchy reflects aspects of meaning or is morphologically autonomous is a question of considerable theoretical and typological interest, as we are not aware of parallel examples from other languages. A third complicating factor is meaning. Verbs mark subject number, which is a relatively familiar notion, but also event number. What this actually means remains far from clear. Cross-linguistically, number can be a property of events in a variety of ways, from simple quantification to inherent characteristics of the verbal meaning . What it means in a given instance depends partly on verb meaning and partly on the situation being described. Given how little we currently know about the semantic and syntactic principles underlying the system, it could be that at least some portion of the morphological complexity can be traced back to as yet unrecognized aspects of meaning or function. These data provide us with two major research opportunities. First, the morphology of verbal paradigms - in its proliferation of classes, in its unpredictability, and in the variable functionality of its forms - has attained a degree of complexity with few parallels in the languages of the world. Second, the meanings and functions subsumed under the rubric 'event number' represent a category which is the subject of lively ongoing research cross-linguistically, and whose status within a general theory of grammatical systems is still being defined. We will work directly with speakers of Seri in Mexico, using various techniques of elicitation to help explain the morphological, semantic and syntactic factors behind this unique system.